Yep, I think I'll send in my resume'.
Posted on 04/27/2002 8:53:14 PM PDT by Pokey78
Frank Batten remembers the day he called a press conference to tell the world about his "exciting new concept" for a TV network.
Weather.
Nothing but weather, 24/7.
"We call it ... the Weather Channel," Batten told the gathered reporters.
The room went totally silent. Then people began to groan, Batten, the former chairman of parent Landmark Communications, recalls in a new book.
Twenty years after its launch, the network that taught Americans about isobars and Icelandic lows is a cable TV staple and a big moneymaker. Ratings in one of its hottest time periods -- the early morning -- beat CNN and Fox News Channel.
But fewer people have been watching the Weather Channel in recent years. And at the network's headquarters near the intersection of I-75 and I-285 on Atlanta's Northside, changes are swirling.
Executives are convinced more viewers will tune in and stay longer if they think of the Weather Channel as a trusted and caring friend instead of just a box of meteorological data.
The trick is making it happen.
One big change being considered is hiring anchors with no meteorological training but lots of personality and energy.
Weather bunnies? At the Weather Channel, which has 120 meteorologists? It has people who have written books about the weather.
"Up until now, the weather has been the star, not the people," says Patrick Scott, the president of Weather Channel Networks. "Weather is still the franchise. That's not about to change," he said, but "we can add more personality."
Lots of other alterations have already been made.
The on-air meteorologists now have talent coaches, for example.
In the past, anchors would be briefed solely on matters related to meteorological matters before they went on the air. Now they hear about "brand equity" and get feedback from viewer focus groups.
Executive producers ponder ways to link forecasts to gardening, stuffed-up noses and traffic jams -- in short, the kind of real life that doesn't show up on weather maps.
Viewers are seeing more video -- inline skaters, sunbathers, cyclists -- and more footage from around sports events. Next weekend, a crew will report from Louisville for the Kentucky Derby.
Plenty of the changes are subtle, like anchors who are trying to be more touchy-feely. Instead of merely saying that Chicago will have a high of 29, meteorologists might tell viewers to button up the kids because it will be a cold one.
And meteorological jargon is now passe.
"I remember when I first arrived," Scott says. "I heard 'dew point' every 15 minutes. And I knew for certain fact that 95 percent of the public didn't have any idea what it meant."
Some changes are hard to miss. Rather than airing an endless cycle of forecasts and statistics, the network has given names to blocks of programs, with the hope that viewers might stay for the whole show.
New series to start</B< P>
Early next year, executives plan to launch a new series called "Storm Stories." Airing at 8 on weeknights, the program will show people caught up in dangerous weather. In the past, viewers groused about having to sit through long feature programs while waiting for their local forecasts, so each episode of the new show is only a half-hour.
Network executives are expecting a payoff in viewership.
"I defy somebody to go by flipping channels and see a funnel cloud touching down and not stop," says Bill Burke, who became president of the Weather Channel Cos. this year.
Keeping people's attention has been a big challenge. The network's typical viewer hangs around only 12.7 minutes per sitting.
The Weather Channel fits an odd role in the TV landscape.
At one time, it ran promotions essentially telling viewers it's OK to admit they watch the channel.
A big pocket of Americans just don't get the whole Weather Channel thing, according to the network's own consultants. Those people are content to stick their hand out the door to figure out the weather.
But they are in the minority, the network's consultants say. Plenty of people are fascinated by the drama of weather. Some won't make plans without knowing what weather is coming. Some are so forecast-fixated that they flip to the Weather Channel to find out what the weather is like for friends and family in other areas.
"I am surprised sometimes how many people really enjoy watching it all the time," says morning anchor Heather Tesch. "Not just turning it on to check in but having it on much of the day."
For many of those viewers, meteorologists are stars. Tesch gets about 100 requests a month for her autograph. And weather hounds can go to the network's Web site, weather.com, to read her bio -- thunderstorms are her favorite weather event, and she named her dog Doppler.
Cable TV viewers consistently rank the Weather Channel as the most valuable and useful network on cable, according to the Beta Brand Identity Study. And weather.com is a top 25 online site, with 15.3 million unique visitors in March, according to Jupiter Media Metrix.
It's all powered by the brand on cable TV.
"They are pretty much considered a cash cow right now," says Derek Baine, senior analyst for Kagan World Media. The firm estimates that the Weather Channel will generate $230 million in revenue this year and $91million in cash flow, a typical measure of media companies that includes earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.
The network is owned by privately held Landmark Communications of Norfolk, Va., which also owns two TV stations, billboards, newspapers and a number of specialty and classified advertising publications.
"They have a monopoly on cable, and it's been very profitable for them," says Joel N. Myers, president of AccuWeather, which provides weather information to businesses and news outlets. "They were either brilliant or lucky to have done what they did."
Storm clouds on horizon in 2001
But 2001 was troubling for the Weather Channel. Overall ratings have been on a gradual decline, and last year they reached their lowest level since 1994 for full-day ratings. The war on terrorism temporarily pulled viewers away from the network, Weather Channel executives say. And weather news generally has been slow over the last two years, without a major hurricane making landfall in the United States.
But the bigger threat is that the Weather Channel is competing for viewers in TV terrain that has grown increasingly crowded with other channels.
All of which has Weather Channel executives memorizing a new mantra for the network.
"It's not about hot, cold, wet, warm, dry," says marketing chief Steve Schiffman. "It's not about the forecast. It's about the Weather Channel understands and cares about the connection between weather and your life."
An innocent question: Do you have windows where you live?
If you think that is bad, we who live in the middle of the map (Arkansas) hardly ever get mentioned unless there is a flood or tornado. The narrator stands in front of the middle of the map and talks interminably about the Northeast then the Northwest and hands it off to the next narrator who starts with the Southeast and then switches to the Southwest, all the while standing in front of my part of the country.
That's not necessarily so--sometimes they'll show California's weather, too. ;-)
That actually is the reason I don't watch them anymore.
That said, now I live in Florida, I can tell you what the weather will be today. Hot and sunny with a chance of afternoon thunderstorms. And tomorrow, and tomorrow, and the day after that.
Funy you mentioned that.. Just last week I realized she WASN'T pregnant. Somewhat unusual development. She must have 10 kids.
Same here. It looks like there was some change of philosophy a year or so ago, and whoever is now in charge doesn't think the Weather Channel is about Weather! You can just feel the "formula" TV experts at work.
If the people there are getting bored with reporting the weather they should find a job doing something else. Weather is about the weather NOW, and in the near future, not this other nonesense. There is no other reason to watch it.
If they took the money they waste on this bull puckey and used it to buy continuous FRESH video of the weather around the country, it would be much more compelling programming.
Same here. It looks like there was some change of philosophy a year or so ago, and whoever is now in charge doesn't think the Weather Channel is about Weather! You can just feel the "formula" TV experts at work.
If the people there are getting bored with reporting the weather they should find a job doing something else. Weather is about the weather NOW, and in the near future, not this other nonesense. There is no other reason to watch it.
If they took the money they waste on this bull puckey and used it to buy continuous FRESH video of the weather around the country, it would be much more compelling programming.
Same here. It looks like there was some change of philosophy a year or so ago, and whoever is now in charge doesn't think the Weather Channel is about Weather! You can just feel the "formula" TV experts at work.
If the people there are getting bored with reporting the weather they should find a job doing something else. Weather is about the weather NOW, and in the near future, not this other nonesense. There is no other reason to watch it.
If they took the money they waste on this bull puckey and used it to buy continuous FRESH video of the weather around the country, it would be much more compelling programming.
I already don't stop any time I see this on TWC. I EXPECT to see funnel clouds on TWC. If it's not live video from outside my front door (and considering where I live, I know it never is) I don't care.
Unless, you know, they got shots of live cows being tossed around or something. That I'd stick around for.
Well about three years ago, I stopped watching the Weather Channel entirely due to one reason: The Internet. The Internet has changed everything. I now have about three dozen weather-related websites bookmarked on my browser such as Accuweather.com and Weatherunderground.com where I can type in a zip code or a state (or even a country) and get instant detailed information about that area. I can even choose to get raw data that the TV weather forecasters get and come to my own conclusions. Or I can tap into weather discussions from meterologists in just about any given state. The vast amount of detailed weather information available online is staggering and just blows away anything that the Weather Channel offers. Turning on the Weather Channel is a total waste of time when I can get detailed conditions and forecasts from anywhere in the world within seconds with just a few keystrokes. For example, one of the reporting stations that Weatherunderground.com uses is less than a mile from my home. So when I was in Alabama, I could sign in and see exactly what the weather was in my backyard in seconds. One day when the temperature unexpectedly hit 90 degrees back home, I was able to call a neighbor to have them turn on my central air so the inside of my house wouldn't get hot that day and possibly ruin my wine collection.
The Weather Channel is no longer useful to me because of the Internet. Just like the Weather Channel itself made the local weatherman on the 6 or 11 o'clock news irrelevant.
Yep, I think I'll send in my resume'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.